A workaday armed robbery at a Russian hairdressers turned into a three day sex ordeal for the would-be stickup merchant, leaving him with torn genitals and a viagra hangover.
The man, only known as Viktor, attempted to turn over a hairdresser in the small town of Meshchovsk on March 14 Russia Today reports. The owner, a 28 year …

COMMENTS

Page:

Torn frenulum

I've looked this up. All joking aside this sounds like a really nasty injury. Possible if you pull up your zipper while your tackle is in the way but I can't conceive of what two people might be doing to cause it. I'm rather glad I can't. He's lucking he's still got something left to dangle. I can understand why he'd go to the plodski, but isn't this an occupational hazard for a proffessional criminal?

Sad face as that's exactly what I think you'd be showing if this happened to you.

Another one for the quotes objection

Legalese aside, the common understanding of what is meant by rape is sex without the victim's consent.

I fail to see how GBH, incarceration, drugging and sexual violation are ok and funny just because it happened to a man. If you still don't get it, imagine a woman tried to rob a man who then beat her up, tied her to a radiator, drugged her and "raped" her. It's pretty bloody obvious those commas are misplaced.

Re: @those saying "why put rape in quotes"

> Under UK law you have to be the owner of the penis to commit rape - a woman cannot legally commit rape - they can commit an act of non-consentual sexual activity, something everyone else would consider to be rape, but it's not rape under UK law...

I had a look at the Sexual Offences Act 2003, you are quite right the legal and (modern) dictionary definitions of rape are very different. In fact, it seems that women can't even commit an act of non-consensual sexual activity (ofcourse this is only the legislation, we all know that 90% of law is case law). I'll quote a bit:

1 Rape

(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—

(a) he intentionally ...

2 Assault by penetration

(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—

(a) he intentionally ...

3 Sexual assault

(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—

(a) he intentionally ...

4 Causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent

(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—

(a) he intentionally ...

However, it appears a lot of legislation suffers from this particular design flaw.

I can understand why the legislators use 'he', rather than the less grammatically correct singular 'they'. Personally I think it would be better if they copied textbook authors (computing textbooks at least) and replaced every occurrence of he and his, with she and her - it would force them to think the legislation they write more carefully : eg.

1 Rape

(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—

(a) she intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with her penis, ...

Classic revenge!

oof

Yet another one for the quotes objection

This is about up there with the responses to "teacher has relationship with student" stories - if it's a male teacher and a female student, everyone bays for blood, but it's a female teacher and a male student, the response is usually some kind of "you dog you! good on ya!" to the victim.

another quotes objection

If you had put that a woman attempted robbery and the man tricked, drugged tied her up and and "raped" her you would be rightly castigated, (which incidentally is what it sounds like she almost did to him) for not taking it seriously. I suppose he was "asking for it" was he?

Another example of the current anti-men attitudes that are becoming all too common. It seems we only abolish one form form of inequality to replace it with another.

Movie deal in the works

More about "s and laws

First let me just add my voice to the people who take exception to that use of quotes. The quotes make it look like you're saying he was kinda raped, but not *really* raped. Either it was rape or it wasn't. You can say alleged rape if you want, or call it a sexual assault if there's doubt about legal definitions.

@steogede, it's true about the rape law. But regarding the sexual assault law, etc, many people still consider "he" the preferred gender neutral pronoun, believe it or not. I think you'll find that most of the laws are written that way. It isn't intended to mean they don't apply to women.

One more for the complaints list.

Well...

I think most of the others have said most of what I could add, except for this: the Reg article states that "Olga was trained in Karate", while the russiatoday.ru link notes that "The 32-year-old Viktor couldn’t have known that the woman was a yellow belt in karate." Now, I've done karate, and where I come from, the yellow belt is the first one you get after white - meaning, the lowest possible graduated level. So either she got very lucky, or poor Victor has to be even more embarrassed since not only did he get beaten up by a chick, but she wasn't even a very advanced karate chick.

@Wortel

@ Pablo

You're right, except from what the other poster said, the law specifically states the rape or sexual assault specifically references the penis, but I may be wrong. I also live in the US, where you can be charged with rape for winking at someone...

well

Re: Chris Hatfield

"The bird on the Russiatoday website looks extremely hot. This story is NOT believable."

What does her looks have anything to do with it? If your going to go and say "A woman that good looking can't be sexually frustrated" well guess again, Women do have a desire for sex equal to any man's,

As for the rape being in quotation marks, I agree the laws need updating. Stories like this are hitting the media more now, thanks to the wonders of Viagra a woman can Rape a man now which up until now wouldn't have been possible.

As if one is needed,

...further proof that English law is an ass.

The English legal definition of rape is "insertion of the penis into the vagina" - since men have the former and women the latter, there /is/ no way a woman can legally rape a man. In this case, the use of the quote marks shows that the crime is indeed "rape" as used contemporously - as in, sexual assault culminating in penetration.

And or those who ask "Would I say the same if it was a woman who tried to commit the robbery but got 'kidnapped' and assaulted?", the answer is "yes." She has, by breaking the law, effectively said she has no respect for the other person and is outside the limits of the legal system, and if the restrictions do not apply to her, then why should the protections? Just because a woman is "of the fairer sex" does not mean a man should not be allowed to RESPOND to violence with violence.

I do not now, and never have, condoned the use of violence against anybody, men OR women - unless they start it. Even then, as in every other case, the response should be reasonable and proportionate - as in, enough to stop the attack but no more than is needed to do so. He or she who lives by the sword, and all that.

Mine's the one with the anti-stab armor plate in the back and the "Xenia Onnatop Fan Club" badge on the front..

Feminism exposed for what it is

Remember this article the next time a feminist tries to tell you that feminism is about "equal rights". It isn't. It's about WOMEN'S rights. If they really were about equal rights, why aren't they jumping up and down about the one-sidedness of rape laws? Oh, that's right... he's only a mere man, so his rights don't count because his having a penis makes him an evil perpetrator of the patriarchy. And the Reg is displaying its own influence by feminism by quoting the word "rape".

Contrary to the misandrous perception propagated by feminists that all men are obsessed with sex and will accept it when offered regardless of the circumstances, men can be and are sexually assaulted against their wishes. I myself was when in high school; I was attacked and molested as a teenager by several girls who ganged up on me. When I fought them back, it was I who got in trouble for attacking them, while they got off scot-free, because "girls don't rape boys, silly!"

So yes, the double standards instituted by rampant feminism in our societies prove that feminism isn't, and never was, about equality. This article is just one of many examples of this one-sided bigotry and provides a prime example of why feminists are lying when they talk about "equality".

P.S. Yes, he should still go down for the robbery. Hopefully both this idiot AND the hairdresser will be stirring some porridge for their respective crimes.